Re: If merging that is really fast forwarding creates new commit

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Nov 7, 2006, 21:37 UTC
Message-ID: <7vhcxb2b15.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0611070729370.3667@g5.osdl.org>

Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Git doesn't even have that concept. There is the concept of a _default_ 
> branch ("master"), and yes, the git repository has it. But at the same 
> time, it really is just a default. There are three "main" branches that 
> Junio maintains, and they only really differ in the degree of development. 
> And "master" isn't even the most stable one - it's just the default one, 
> because it's smack dab in the middle: recent enough to be interesting, but 
> still stable enough to be worth tracking for just about anybody.
>
> But really, "maint" is the stable branch, and in many ways you could say 
> that "maint" is the trunk branch, since that's what Junio still cuts 
> releases from.

The branch 'maint' is meant to be the moral equivalent of the efforts of your -stable team, so it shouldn't be "the trunk", but you caught me.

We haven't seen a new release from 'master' for about a month. I think the dust has settled already after two big topics (packed-refs, delta-offset-base) were merged into 'master' since v1.4.3, and it is now time to decide which topics that have been cooking in 'next' are the ones I want in v1.4.4. Perhaps by the end of the week, I'll cut a v1.4.4-rc1 to start the pre-release stabilization process. No new features nor enhancements on 'master' after that until v1.4.4 final.